this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
588 points (97.1% liked)

196

2281 readers
1794 users here now

Community Rules

You must post before you leave

Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).

Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.

Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.

Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".

Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.

Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.

Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.

Avoid AI generated content.

Avoid misinformation.

Avoid incomprehensible posts.

No threats or personal attacks.

No spam.

Moderator Guidelines

Moderator Guidelines

  • Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
  • Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
  • When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
  • Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
  • Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
  • Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
  • Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
  • Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
  • Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
  • Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
  • Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
  • Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
  • First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
  • Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
  • No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
  • Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
  • Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
588
rule (i.imgur.com)
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

To clarify, white people are actually slightly underrepresented in terrorism per capita; they simply constitute a significant majority of the population and therefore do most of the terrorism. Therefore, while this tweet is technically correct, it should not be taken to mean that white individuals are more likely to be terrorists—it’s an ironic reflection on the skewed, racially motivated reality presented to us by media and politicians.

Source:

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/fbi-releases-lone-offender-terrorism-report-111319
https://www.statista.com/chart/19968/the-race-ethnicity-of-lone-offender-terrorists/ https://www.theroot.com/are-white-men-americas-biggest-terror-threat-we-checke-1830175112 https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/14/fbi-and-dhs-warned-of-growing-threat-from-white-supremacists-months-ago/

top 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Apytele 44 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

A similar statistical anomaly is that more men are sexually assaulted in the armed forces than women, but it's just because there are much more of them overall. An individual woman is still more likely to be assaulted than an individual man.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 6 days ago (2 children)

As always, the takeaway is that demographics are not what must be addressed when addressing violence. The systemic artifacts that enable and foster terrorism or SA are the problem, never simply structures like gender or race.

The conservative mindset ignores this and just introduces more violence to the equation, saying “let’s ban women from spaces” and “let’s deport brown people.” And act surprised when those solutions make the problem worse, not better.

[–] Apytele 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

And when they do raise issues like sexual assault against men, it's pretty much only ever as a counterpoint to derail discussions about sexual assault against women and avoid doing anything about either, which I would argue is also pretty disrespectful towards men.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 days ago

Absolutely. “Men can be victims too” is such an important truth and it’s nauseating when the phrase is leveraged in support of radical apathy toward SA.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

What do you mean by systemic artifacts? Real question, id like to understand better

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Great question! With that I refer to structures, attitudes, policies, norms, or institutional practices. Here are some examples.

For SA:

  • societal attitudes like rape culture/“boys will be boys”
  • institutional coverups that protect perpetrators rather than victims
  • weak or bad laws that discourage reporting
  • sex education failures
  • support and recovery system failures
  • economic failures where victims may be unable to escape abuse due to financial dependence or other inequities
  • harmful media representation
  • and more

For terrorism a lot of what radicalizes people has to do with alienation—people who feel violently disconnected from their social context are more likely to act violently:

  • corruption
  • poverty
  • educational failures
  • overly agressive counterterrorism like mass surveillance
  • racism
  • religious or ethnic discrimination
  • human rights abuses
  • mental health treatment failures
  • physical health treatment failures (look at Luigi Mangione)
  • and more

Just like how “boys will be boys” never excuses SA, of course, none these systemic artifacts excuse the resulting violence. These artifacts are simply what a society needs to address in order to mitigate the violence and protect its people.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Thank you for writing that out. Mission accomplished

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

Yay! Glad to help.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

Gruesomely mass murdering civilians using bombs to get the rest to comply with your will is only "Terrorism" if the bombs were placed on the ground and then exploded, not when they were dropped from the air.

Hence the smaller per-capita representation of white people in the count of terrorists.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago

HAHAHA this is such good analysis.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

That covers land and air. What about sea?

[–] [email protected] 31 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That's because we don't do terrorism, we do mental health issues

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

*stands outside house and claps in appreciation.*
"There. If that doesn't solve our issues I dont know what will."

~ Tory Government, circa not long ago.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Re your subtext, you have to account for what actually gets labeled as terrorism. A brown, bearded, muslim looking person could pee on the side of the road and have it classified as terrorism

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago

Obviously they were trying to destroy the Western civilastion as whole, it's not like sometimes people end up pissing outsie because you can't find free public toilets anyfuckingwhere!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 days ago (1 children)

What did the whites do? We only murdered a shitload of minorities. Oh shit, do minorities also care if you murder their family?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

whites went to other people’s land, mass murdered almost everyone and then tortured the survivors for centuries.

next to that, ISIS may as well be a group of shoplifters

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago

yea? I was just continuing on what you said

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Question: do we attribute Russia's actions to terrorism? I would wager yes, as it can easily be labeled as a terrorist state at this point. In that case, I think we can give them lots of credit, right?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Ummm I don’t really know what actions you mean.

In any case, by most standards Russian individuals would be called white, haha.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think that's the point. Also, I think they are referring to Ukraine and interference with elections of other nations.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Ah I see. I don’t know that many definitions of terrorism include invasion and election interference—that’s another category of crime as far as I am aware.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

TBH, I don't know any definitions of terrorism that are self consistent (that being, including everything that is definitely terrorism while discluding everything that definitely isn't.)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

I once heard that the key to a good joke is it needs to be both unexpected and inevitable. This is a good joke.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

Ken Cheng is the true princess of our hearts.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

For it to be terrorism it has to be motivated by political or religious ideology. So all the highschool kids who snap and murder a bunch of their classmates: not terrorism. However: the IRA or Timothy McVeigh or the Unabomber: definitely terrorism.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I think that's an unnecessary splitting of hairs, because both the Unabomber and the school shooter become political in the aftermath

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

So if someone has a heart attack while driving and their car plows into a busy shopping street. Then whether or not they are regarded as a terrorist depends on whether or not someone tries to ban old people from driving because of it?

Or to ask a different question, how would you define terrorism? Because the Oxford English dictionary definition is:

"The calculated use of violence or threat of violence to inculcate fear. Terrorism is intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

That last bit sort of discounts the majority of gun violence generally. And yes in terms of the result, it is splitting hairs. But, knowing the motivation behind a crime is important. You're going to have more success preventing school shootings by investing in mental health services than you will in anti terrorism policing.

Also if two separate people wake up one morning and person A decides to kill the first person he sees. Person Bdecides to kill the first black person he sees. They both end up killing a black man, and both end up in prison. During rehabilitation, if you treat both as a hate crime, then you're not properly addressing the violent impulses with person A and if you only address the violent behaviour then you aren't addressing the underlying racism in person B. Motivation matters in how things are handled generally.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This is not quite accurate. One definition of terrorism from the FBI:

International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored)

Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature

You are correct that many (not sure about percentage) school shootings would not be considered terrorism by this definition, though, and I agree with you on that. White people do a lot of terrorism outside of schools though and that’s the point of the post.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

My point is that noone is looking at the IRA and crying mental illness. Furthermore, if you look at the Wikipedia pages for people like Anders Behring Breivik, Ted Kaczynski, and Timothy McVeigh, they all refer to them as terrorists. Whereas people like James Holmes are listed as mass murderers because their crimes were not politically motivated.